-Caveat Lector-

"Jim Condit Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Is this a subject that falls under revisionism and therefore can only be
> discussed from one side on this list? Looks like we have a de facto state
> religion forming in Amsterdam and elsewhere -- together with is own
> "dogmas" that cannot be questioned without penalties and maybe jail time,
> eh? Jim Condit Jr. P.S. Upon re-reading the above questions sounds
> sarcastic, but it is meant to be serious.
>
> On Thursday, December 10, 1998 3:15 PM, Robert Tatman
> [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> >  -Caveat Lector-
> >
> > Court bans questions on Anne Frank veracity
<snipped for space>

Jim, this is a legitimate question, and the answer troubles me, because I am
afraid it may be "yes". As I read the story, the court's view is that the
events presented in the *Diary* are matters of established fact and cannot
ipso facto be challenged, precisely *because* they are generally, if not
universally, agreed to be true. Such a decision would not be possible in the
United States, as it flies in the face of the First Amendment; however, the
European approach to freedom of speech is quite different, and not entirely
consistent.

I *personally* accept Anne Frank's account; I also accept that the Holocaust
happened, and I must lay the primary responsibility for that abomination at
the feet of the German people, for all of eternity. But (and please note my
conditions), *if* a legitimate historian can produce valid documentary
evidence, acceptable to the profession as a whole, that casts doubt on the
extermination of the Jews and other minorities by the Nazis, repeat, *if* such
valid evidence can be produced, then it should and must be carefully examined
alongside the evidence to the contrary (such as the films made of the camps
both by the Germans themselves and by the liberating Allied armies). These
conditions are stringent, and I frankly doubt that any Holocaust deniers will
be able to meet them. But the Dutch court's decision implies that no one is
allowed to challenge the historicity of the Holocaust, with or without
evidence; and *that* suggests that, indeed, the Holocaust has become a
shibboleth.

Bob

=================================
Robert F. Tatman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Remove "nospam" from the address to reply.

NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed 
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included 
information for research and educational purposes. For
more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

POSTING THIS MESSAGE TO THE INTERNET DOES NOT IMPLY PERMISSION TO SEND UNSOLICITED 
COMMERCIAL E-MAIL (SPAM) TO THIS OR ANY OTHER INTERNET ADDRESS. RECEIPT OF SPAM WILL 
RESULT IN IMMEDIATE NOTIFICATION OF THE SENDER'S ISP.

____________________________________________________________________
More than just email--Get your FREE Netscape WebMail account today at 
http://home.netscape.com/netcenter/mail

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.

========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to